Questions remain after Berberich couple's deaths

John Sr. and Zona Berberich died Friday after being in a vehicle crash; investigation continues

Shawnee County Sheriff's Cpl. Jace Beightel stood nearby directing traffic Wednesday as a tow truck removed a transport van that became involved in a two-vehicle accident while carrying John Berberich Sr., 69, and Zona Berberich, 67. Obituaries published in The Capital-Journal indicated the Berberichs subsequently died hours apart on Friday.

Related Stories

John T. Berberich Sr. was his wife’s “first and only love,” according to their daughter Debbie Holroyd.

Zona, 67, and John, 69, were on their way to a hospice care center July 16 when the A and A Medical Transit van they were in was struck by a Ford Focus at S.W. 21st and Auburn Road.

Two days later they died, hours apart, even though their injuries weren ‘t considered to be life-threatening at the scene.

And now, in the throes of grief, the family searches for answers into what might have gone wrong.

“My mom seemed fine — they told us their injuries were nonlife-threatening,” Holroyd said. “We don’t understand. We just want to know what happened.”

Holroyd said the Shawnee County coroner, Charles Glenn, informed the family Monday that Zona’s death was caused by the crash. The cause of John’s death is pending the result of an autopsy.

“I, stupidly, expected an answer today,” she said.

The driver of the Focus, Roxy Senogles, 60, of Topeka, wasn’t injured but was charged for failing to yield the right of way at a stop sign, according to The Topeka Capital-Journal report from that day.

As of Monday, Holroyd said her family hadn’t been contacted by Senogles, her insurance company or by the van company.

According to Holroyd, the driver of the van involved in the crash said he didn’t have medical training, so he called 911. However, Holroyd said, another A and A driver came to the scene and comforted Zona until emergency personnel arrived. She had to be extricated from the van, according to police.

A and A Medical Transportation declined to comment.

“The boss and the manager said we are not supposed to talk about it because of the investigation,” said Scott Harrop, an assistant manager for the company who was at the scene.

A representative from the coroner’s office said Glenn is the only one who can release cause and manner of death information to the media. Glenn wasn’t available for comment.

Shawnee County Sheriff Herman T. Jones said Monday his office is investigating.

“It is not a closed investigation,” he said.

On top of losing her parents, Holroyd said her family knew John “was going to pass,” and making the decision to go into end-of-life care wasn’t easy.

“He was conscious. He was able to talk to us when he got into the van,” she said. “After the accident, he was not able to talk, but I know he heard us.”

After spending their lives together, Zona and John died without each other.

“My mom didn’t get to say goodbye to my dad,” she said through tears. “They took him. (My parents) weren’t able to be together.”

John and Zona met in New Jersey “when (John) famously chased away bullies harassing (Zona) on tennis courts in Jersey City,” she said.

They were married in November 1966 and moved to Topeka in 1979.

Zona, according to her daughter, loved animals, and her father found joy in working with nonprofit groups around the city.

Holroyd said her parents were at every game, play, and grandparents’ day at school for each of their eight grandchildren.

Despite her grief and the weight of unanswered questions, Holroyd fondly remembered her parents.

“My mom and dad were the most kind, giving, loving parents you can imagine,” she said.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of
civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site.
Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate
language, but readers might find some comments offensive or
inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the
"Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

...The sentiment for the people who cause the crash. I'll concede Roxie Senogles didn't have malicious intent when she failed to yield at a stop sign, but she walked away from the collision. As Ms. Sweeney reported, "[Ms. Senogles] wasn’t injured but was charged for failing to yield the right of way at a stop sign." Let me emphasize, Roxie Senogles is ALIVE! She WASN'T injured!

John and Zona Berberich are DEAD! Shawnee County coroner Charles Glenn has apparently established "Zona’s death was caused by the crash." I'll wager the crash was a contributing factor in John's death, too.

So, some of you offer your condolences to Roxie Senogles, the person responsible for the collision that led to two people dying. I'll save my condolences for the Berberich family, which is the clear victim in this case.

Flinging a couple tons of steel and glass at someone in the form of a car is just as deadly as a bullet. When you drive terribly, it is like shooting a giant bullet at whoever might be passing by. Running a stop sign on a well-travelled road, and killing two people as a direct result, is not "just an accident" --- it is homicide. If you don't get that, you should not be driving.

The article says they were on their way to hospice care when they were struck. Hospice care is usually (always?) for those who are terminally ill.

This is a horrible tragedy, to be sure. And the article clearly states that the accident contributed to Zona's death. As for John, it's not clear yet.

But before the lynch mob decides to string up the driver for double murder, shouldn't it at least be determined whether or not this sort of impact is typically fatal, or whether the apparent terminal state of the victims may have contributed to their extreme reaction to the accident?

You know, a waitress that carelessly trips and spills a bowl of queso on a customer is one thing. If it falls on a customer with a dairy allergy, it has far more severe consequences because of the reaction of the victim. But the action of the waitress was the same, either way.

So some want to charge a 60 year old woman with murder. Give me A BREAK. It was an unfortunate accident. I know I have carelessly ran red lights and stop signs through the years as we all have, luckily there wasn't an accident involved.

First let me say how sorry I am for their loss. Tragic, but when someone is responsible for a crash that leads to a death, and yes it says Zona's death was crash related, that is not an accident. Anymore than leaving a child in a hot car to die, is an accident. As a parent, they are responsible for the child's care. We all know the lady didn't intend to cause a wreck, but her actions resulted in a death. Such a tragic end for the couple. Thoughts are with the Berberich family.

Hospice is end of life care if the patient has six months or less to live, determined by a physician. The story referenced John 'not having much time left' but the extreme trauma of the accident definitely could have been a factor in his demise; autopsy will determine that. But the accident did kill his wife...and that's vehicular homicide.

It's not like 'spilling queso' on a customer (Longhawk).....it's using a vehicle to take two peoples lives! Was she talking on her cellphone or texting, or was she under the influence of medication? Did the officers even check those things? Somehow, I doubt it. Regardless of her 'intent', two people are dead.

I find it unconscionable that Ms. Senogles doesn't have the decency and compassion to reach out to the family of those who died because of her actions. That alone speaks volumes about her character. Even in their extreme grief, the family would find a small measure of comfort to know she CARED.

The intersection in reference is a very busy one, and with the exit lane for north bound and the turn lane for south bound, I can see how a 60 year old person could get confused. I don't believe there is any intent or willful act, like DUI or driving too fast. I think the 60 year old woman will bear this tragic accident until her death. Leave her alone. If you must blame someone, how about the county for not putting in a modern traffic signal or at least a four way stop?

This is what society has created. In a lawsuit-happy world, "reaching out" can be legally construed as an admission of fault.

Here's the thing. Everyone is ready to string this poor ol' gal up by her thumbs. Even you are suggesting she was probably exercising inattentive driving. How do you know? Tell me you have never made a mistake while driving. Speeding, rolling stops, changed lanes and forced someone to slow down, etc. And I will call you a liar. 60 year-old women are HUMAN. Unless she is proven to have been intentionally impared, then she deserves the benefit of the doubt.

My point above is that the respondants at the scene believed these injuries to be non life-threatening. This wreck must not have been that big of a deal, at least to those who observed it and the patients afterwards.

It is absolutely worth asking the question as to whether this was a minor accident that, under normal circustances, would not have contributed to the deaths of those in the vehicle. If the answer is, "NO! She was drunk, texting and driving barefoot!", well, then, procede with your lynch mob.

Ms. Sweeney wrote: "On top of losing her parents, Holroyd said her family knew John 'was going to pass,' and making the decision to go into end-of-life care wasn’t easy.

"'He was conscious. He was able to talk to us when he got into the van,' she said. 'After the accident, he was not able to talk, but I know he heard us.'"

"The article says they were on their way to hospice care when they were struck. Hospice care is usually (always?) for those who are terminally ill." --longhawk

Not always. My oma developed shingles late in life while being cared for by my brother and me. Her primary care physician ordered hospitalization because my oma's condition continued to worsen. She had advanced dementia and couldn't directly communicate her pain to the doctors. We could tell she was suffering, though. Things seemed to be spiraling downward once she entered the hospital. Her PCP ordered hospice care and we took our oma home.

When we can't explain something, we often turn to the supernatural. Well, I have no other way to explain it. My oma lived. She got better. You could sense the ease she felt lying in her own bed once more immediately upon returning home. She resumed eating and we were able to take her off hospice care within a month. The nurses ceased their visits. We switched doctors soon after we brought our oma home. More than a year later, she suffered a stroke that made it nigh impossible for her to feed herself anymore. She improved somewhat over time, but she never regained her ability to feed herself. A subsequent stroke eight months after the first, affecting the other side of her body, contributed to her death. She lived about a month more before dying in her bed at night. Hospice care does not ALWAYS mean end-of-life care.

"This is a horrible tragedy, to be sure. And the article clearly states that the accident contributed to Zona's death. As for John, it's not clear yet." --longhawk

I refuse to call this incident an accident. Accidents happen. This collision was preventable. The crash did more than contribute to Zona's death. Ms. Sweeney wrote: "Shawnee County coroner, Charles Glenn, informed the family Monday that Zona’s death was CAUSED [emphasis added] by the crash. The cause of John’s death is pending the result of an autopsy."

"But before the lynch mob decides to string up the driver for double murder, shouldn't it at least be determined whether or not this sort of impact is typically fatal, or whether the apparent terminal state of the victims may have contributed to their extreme reaction to the accident?" --longhawk

No one above has called this incident murder. One respondent, the_big_bee, has called it homicide, which I think is appropriate. When a person kills another human being it's homicide. The definition is pretty clear. It matters not whether "this sort of impact is TYPICALLY [emphasis added] fatal. It matters whether Roxy Senogles caused the death of two people because of her negligence. It has been established that her actions caused the death of at least one person. Whether this leads to further criminal action will be determined.

Moreover, Zona Berberich was NOT receiving hospice care. As reported above, "My mom seemed fine — they told us their injuries were nonlife-threatening," Holroyd said. 'We don’t understand. We just want to know what happened." I hope the Berberich family sues Ms. Senogles regardless whether she faces criminal prosecution. They can never get their parents back. They're D-E-A-D!

"You know, a waitress that carelessly trips and spills a bowl of queso on a customer is one thing. If it falls on a customer with a dairy allergy, it has far more severe consequences because of the reaction of the victim. But the action of the waitress was the same, either way." --longhawk

Your analogy doesn't meet the smell test. Roxie Senogles was cited "for failing to yield the right of way at a stop sign."

The legal definition of malice requires intent. Unless the driver intended to hit another vehicle and cause harm, there is, as a matter of law, no malice.

That leaves negligence as the only potential legal violation. We do not have enough facts here to know if negligence existed. We don't know if the driver had a medical issue that suddenly occurred (the article says she was ok, but only addresses her condition after the crash and we don't know what it was just prior to the crash). We don't know if the sun was in her eyes or another obstruction prevented her seeing the stop sign or the van.

Of course, we also don't know if she was distracted by a cell phone or something else that shouldn't have been happening while driving.

We know that the officer cited her for failing to yield the right of way, but the issue would be why she failed to yield the right of way.

We know that the officer has assigned liability to the driver. And that means that her insurance will be on the hook, and also that she could be subject to suit for any damages beyond her policy limits, but that suit may go nowhere depending on what the cause for the failure to yield were and depending on the possibly limited assets of the driver. But the facts seem clear from the officer's charge that no claim for criminal negligence, nor for any other criminal act in this case, will go anywhere, nor could they likely be established if the officer didn't even see facts to substantiate such a charge.

This is a very tragic story. But it sounds like we could all do well to live they type of lives the Berberiches lived in helping others and the society around us with whatever time and health we have.

longhawk is right: Ms Senogle's insurance company probably gave her very explicit instructions NOT to contact the Berberich family. It has nothing to do with compassion or decency or character; instead, it's about her ability to follow legal advice.

That's pretty standard advice in any accident, no matter who is at fault: don't talk to the other side. Let the professionals handle it. It's sad that our society has gotten to this point, but it has.

"Even you [getNolder] are suggesting she was probably exercising inattentive driving. How do you know?" --longhawk

We don't know. We DO know Ms. Senogles was cited "for failing to yield the right of way at a stop sign."

"60 year-old women are HUMAN." --longhawk

What does Ms. Senogles' age have to do with this incident? You bear some fault if you fail "to yield the right of way at a stop sign" and collide with another vehicle whether you're 60 or 16.

"Unless she is proven to have been intentionally impared, then she deserves the benefit of the doubt." --longhawk

Not in the court of public opinion. Because of the ubiquitous use of cellphones these days, it's justifiable to question whether Ms. Senogles was using such a device at the time she caused the crash that led to the death of two people. People are free to speculate about other factors that may have impaired her ability to operate a vehicle. What is indisputable, however, is Ms.Senogles caused the crash that led to the death of two people.

"My point above is that the respondants at the scene believed these injuries to be non life-threatening. This wreck must not have been that big of a deal, at least to those who observed it and the patients afterwards." --longhawk

While "respondants [sic] at the scene [may have] believed these injuries to be non life-threatening," it is NOT accurate to write: "This wreck must not have been that big of a deal, at least to those who observed it and the patients afterwards."

Ms. Sweeney reported, "According to Holroyd, the driver of the van involved in the crash said he didn’t have medical training, so he called 911. However, Holroyd said, another A and A driver came to the scene and comforted Zona until emergency personnel arrived. She had to be extricated from the van, according to police." The salient points being 911 had to be called and Zona Berberich "had to be extricated from the van." It's not clear from the article, but it appears Mr. and Mr. Berberich were transported by ambulance from the scene, were hospitalized and died in hospital two days after the collision.

The concussive effects of a crash, even one that seems minor at first, can be long-lasting and severely debilitating...even leading to death. There are many anecdotes in medical literature where people have walked away from a collision only to have medical professionals discover the severity of their injuries much later.

Here are the prima facie facts: Ms. Senogles failed to yield the right of way at a stop sign and was cited by law enforcement officials on scene. Ms. Senogles struck another vehicle while operating hers. Two people in the vehicle Ms. Senogles struck are DEAD. Further investigation of the incident is pending.

"It is absolutely worth asking the question as to whether this was a minor accident that, under normal circustances [sic], would not have contributed to the deaths of those in the vehicle." --longhawk

Have you seen the photo of the big, white, handicap-accessible transport van?
If you are stopped at a stop sign, and paying attention, would you see that big van?

When you do something that creates victims, you are responsible for what you did to them. It doesn't matter if they are newborn babies or old people --- you don't necessarily get to choose how your victims react to what you have done to them.

I've seen some inane, out of touch statements, but you may have raced to the TOP of LIST. Let me get this straight. Following your train of thought EVERY automobile ACCIDENT that results in a FATALITY is a HOMICIDE?

Settle down. In what way have I shown a lack of compassion for the victims? Horrible tragedy. I've said nothing to the contrary of that. (by the way, forgive me if I don't run the spell check. Save your "[sic]" for real publications, and not comments sections OK?)

True story--12 years ago, I was in an accident. Driver was on meth--crossed the center lane, forced my car (me, my pregnant wife and 2-old daughter) off the road and through a farmer's fence. Shredded my car, but we all lived. The meth head did not. He hit the car right behind us, killing himself and the poor old man driving that car behind me, and left that poor man's passenger badly broken, but alive, in a flaming car. We got that nice lady out, and she survived.

The meth head had taken that car without his girlfriend's permission, so the insurance company denied EVERYBODY's claims. Said it was a stolen vehicle. HERE'S THE KICKER....that farmer came after ME for the damages to his fence!!!!!

MY POINT....I know two things that are certain, and one of them's not taxes (you can get out of those). One IS death. We all die. And the other is that people are not happy unless they can find somebody to blame for EVERYTHING, and doing that makes them feel better about themselves.

I don't know the driver in this case, and she surely made a mistake. But I'm certain she didn't mean to kill anyone, and I think it's disgusting to watch people cast their venom on her without knowing all the facts. EVERYBODY makes driving mistakes. If you don't believe that, you are blind. She was horribly unlucky that hers had tragic results. But she MAY OR MAY NOT be a criminal (driving citations typically don't count as criminal activities). We don't know yet. You have already tried her.

TREMENDOUS post!! The only problem is that you are talking to PERFECT people who have NEVER made a MISTAKE in their lives let alone when they were driving!! Trying to have a sensible, rational debate with them is (in the words of my dearly departed Father) like trying to nail JELL-O to a tree. LOL

"In what way have I shown a lack of compassion for the victims? Horrible tragedy. I've said nothing to the contrary of that." --longhawk

I don't dispute you made mention of this incident being a "horrible tragedy," but you've also been Ms. Senogles' most ardent defender in this thread. I can't imagine anyone offering her their condolences, as FormerArmy did. What did she lose...her time? Given what you've been through, I find your defense of her most perplexing. She walked away from the collision uninjured. She's ALIVE! Mr. and Mrs. Berberich are dead...D-E-A-D...DEAD!

You erroneously claimed people in this thread are ready to hang the woman. I've seen no evidence of that. You're projecting more on us who, rightly, feel worse for the Berberich family. Their mom and dad are gone. Mrs. Senogles may only have to deal with a hurt conscience the rest of her life. Where's the fairness in that?

"(by the way, forgive me if I don't run the spell check. Save your "[sic]" for real publications, and not comments sections OK?)" --longhawk

See that little squiggly red thing that occasionally appears when you type? You needn't wait for spell check. I use sic to demonstrate I'm quoting your words verbatim.

"True story--12 years ago, I was in an accident."

It wasn't an accident based upon your description of the incident. I'm sorry to learn you and, more important, your family were the victim of this maniac. I'm glad to learn he's dead. It's truly a horrible tragedy--if I may borrow your words--he took another man's life and nearly killed the woman accompanying him in the vehicle behind you. Props to you for extricating her before she died!

"The meth head had taken that car without his girlfriend's permission, so the insurance company denied EVERYBODY's claims. Said it was a stolen vehicle. HERE'S THE KICKER....that farmer came after ME for the damages to his fence!!!!!" --longhawk

Good lord! [shakes head]

"MY POINT....I know two things that are certain, and one of them's not taxes (you can get out of those). One IS death. We all die. And the other is that people are not happy unless they can find somebody to blame for EVERYTHING, and doing that makes them feel better about themselves." --longhawk

I think we are too litigious a society, but if ever there was a case to be made for civil court, this is one. We sue people to make ourselves whole. The Berberich family has inexplicably lost their mother and father. Even with their father entering end-of-life care, they couldn't anticipate the horrible tragedy that unfolded, ripping their mom and dad away from them so suddenly and unjustifiably.

"I don't know the driver in this case, and she surely made a mistake." --lh

We agree.

"...I'm certain she didn't mean to kill anyone..." --lh

I concur.

"...I think it's disgusting to watch people cast their venom on her without knowing all the facts." --lh

I don't think I, or for that matter the_big_bee, have been venomous in calling out Ms. Senogles' complicity in this incident. We have enough facts to form an opinion and our viewpoints are necessarily colored by our prior experience.

"EVERYBODY makes driving mistakes. If you don't believe that, you are blind." --lh

Not everybody makes driving mistakes that result in the death of two people. Ms. Senogles was cited "for failing to yield the right of way at a stop sign." I'm not willing to gloss over this material fact. Why you persist ignoring this salient point befuddles me.

She was horribly unlucky...horribly unlucky?! Boy, that's a winner! How long are you going to roll with that notion? Darn it, now I'm not calm.

"...[S]he MAY OR MAY NOT be a criminal (driving citations typically don't count as criminal activities). We don't know yet. You have already tried her." --lh

I'm not a member of any jury. As you pointed out previously, this is a message board; I'm not compelled to be objective. I've given Ms. Senogles as much benefit of the doubt as I'm willing to give her. The investigation of this incident is ongoing. She may be cited for other infractions. There are lots of questions that must be answered.

Did she have a cellphone on her person? Was she using the device when she struck the van transporting Mr. and Mrs. Berberich? Was she attending to something else other than driving that compelled her to overlook a big white van, causing her to collide with said vehicle? Was she under the influence of any substance that might have impaired her ability to operate a vehicle safely? Does she have a medical condition that might diminish her driving performance? Did she have a medical episode that contributed to her colliding with the van carrying Mr. and Mrs. Berberich? Was she subjected to a field sobriety test? Did she have to undergo a toxicology screen?

Ultimately, however, I'm left with this knowledge. Mr. and Mrs Berberich can't speak for themselves anymore. They're gone. Ms. Senogles doesn't have that problem.

" I'm sorry to learn you and, more important, your family were the victim of this maniac. I'm glad to learn he's dead."

--I'm not glad he's dead, and neither is the family of the victims. He was 27. He had a young daughter who is growing up without her dad, and she's going to learn (if she doesn't already know) what a d0uche he was and how he died. I would have much rather see him survive and get help. (there I go, showing compassion for the bad guy again).

He was a hopeless addict, and frankly, I think it was criminal that he was allowed on the road (he was allowed out on bond, awaiting sentencing for his THIRD DUI. How do you allow that?).

Here is an article from last year about the son on of the victims. They are a good family. He speaks quite a bit on the topic.

One point of clarification...the article mentions that the bad guy's car caught on fire and he died. That is true, but he was quite dead before the flames got him. I know what the last thing was that went through his head--it was a steering wheel! A couple people pulled him out, sprayed him with a fire extinguisher, and he laid there on the scorching asphalt, almost in one piece.

...The link to the article. I don't share your compassion for the driver that nearly took your and your family's life and robbed Mrs. Knowles of her husband and Mr. Howard of his dad.

I agree Joshua West should never have been released from custody. His fiery death was a fitting end to his worthless adult life. His daughter is better off not knowing him. The recidivism rate for methamphetamine addicts is incredibly high. It's most unlikely he would have ever kicked his habit once he started using regularly. Society is better off without him. It's a terrible injustice he took down an honorable man in the process of his own self-destruction. Mr. Knowles surely didn't deserve to die they way he perished.

I'm afraid we will live to disagree about this episode, as well as the one that began our debate. While I find your willingness to forgive charitable, I think it's misguided. Not all humanity is worth saving. Some people, in fact, deserve to die.

I can't reconcile your compassion for Joshua West or Roxy Senogles, especially given your personal experience. I am not similarly forgiving. Joshua West was a degenerate and merited death. Roxy Senogles may be a civic-minded person who simply made a life-changing mistake. There's much we don't know about the collision that led to Mr. and Mrs. Berberich dying.

I'm not prepared to convict Ms. Senogles. I'm in no place to do that. But I am prepared to render my opinion based upon the facts I have. She made a grievous error that contributed to the death of two people. The Shawnee County Coroner has already determined Mrs. Berberich's death was caused by the collison. Ms. Senogles may not be criminally liable for the death of two people, but she is surely civilly responsible for the same.

I'll save my compassion and condolences for the Berberich family. They remain the true victims of this tragic incident.